Because they don’t have the means to fight back and win. Because if they insist on intifada they will end up with nothing. --DarkGamer
They are unlikely to win but if they did, yes, the consequences would be existential. It wasn’t long ago that Israel was the underdog in this conflict. --DarkGamer
So they are both weak and strong. Hrm right out of the fascists handbook.
Keep telling us who you are when you get back from your goose-stepping practice.
Wtf is that? Yer just trolling at this point.
Always with worst possible take no matter the subject.
They are unlikely to win
One of the most modern and well funded militaries in the world backed by the world superpower VS guys with ak-47s of vietnam era vintage.
You cannot be serious.
If you really think this is true that Israel would be defeated by hamas you are beyond rational discussion and of in some fantasy world of victimhood.
Spare me your insults.
How bout you spare me your inane fictions and we can talk. If you cannot manage that then just piss off.
Well you missed the mark.
What a moronic comment.
"I demand sources that are easily goggleable and will declare victory if you don't do the search for me!" -- girlfreddy
Open a fucking history book. This isn't hard.
Dude the slaves in the US had jobs (unpaid of course) and were working when they revolted. They totally should have been grateful and tried some civil disobedience instead. /S
It certainly seems like the Jews are once again being blamed for the consequences of a war they did not start
Hey look it's the cudgel I mentioned in another post. No one is talking about Jews here except you when you want to wield it as a weapon to shut down discussion.
Calling everything anti-semitism when it's only criticism of Israel makes it easier for actual anti-Semites to find cover. See: "The boy who cried wolf" or "chicken little" for reference.
Stop it, it's gross and unhelpful.
I presume that alternative involves another Nakba and more annexation, probably slowly via settlements. Palestine’s best bet would be choosing a strong leader who is willing to abandon fruitless intifada, negotiate for peace, make realistic concessions, and enforce it.
How many times since the first nakba has that been tried already and sabotaged by outside forces or by israel directly? No really, I want you to go look it up so you will not need to repeat a silly thing like this again.
Only in america.
LOL you are amazing at justifying your bullshit.
I noticed the zionists seem to like saying that gaza isn't being carpet bombed and such so how do you explain :
“Dresden, Hamburg, Cologne — some of the world’s heaviest-ever bombings are remembered by their place names,” said Robert Pape, a US military historian and author of Bombing to Win, a landmark survey of 20th century bombing campaigns. “Gaza will also go down as a place name denoting one of history’s heaviest conventional bombing campaigns.” from the financial times (non paywalled no excuses link https://archive.ph/DSZ1b/ )
They even have pretty graphs showing how it is worse.
Oh and since you seem to think TIME is an issue for me tell me how fast was WW2 vs everything since Oct 7?? Nevermind I'll just tell you since your propaganda addled brain (yea that's an insult you dipshit) will try to block it out. "By contrast, over the space of two years, between 1943 and 1945, the Allied bombing of 61 major German cities razed an estimated 50 per cent of their urban areas, according to Pape."
Odd how these things seem bad even in the light of history, maybe Israel can get all the way to # 1 on the charts!!!